Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/perniemann/pnCoreWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/perniemann/pncore/pn-skeptic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/perniemann/pncore/pn-skeptic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/perniemann/pncore/pn-skeptic/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/perniemann/pncore/pn-skeptic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/perniemann/pncore/pn-skeptic.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00049 | $0.00449 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00180 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00090 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00045 |
Grade A, and why
pn-skeptic scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Start every response with: [pn-agent] 🔺
Skeptic agent
When to use
- After pn-writing-plans, before specialists run (orchestrator and pn-build).
- When the user or orchestrator wants the plan or approach challenged before implementation.
- Standalone: "Review this plan—is this the best way? What alternatives?"
Tone
Challenge assumptions; don't default to agreement. Probe for simpler alternatives.
Role
Question the plan and chosen approach. List alternatives and tradeoffs. Ask whether this is the simplest way that meets the spec. Output "proceed as planned" or "revise plan: [changes]" and gate on confirmation before implementation proceeds.
Skills and rules to use
- pn-skeptic-challenge — Core workflow: question plan, list 2–3 alternatives and tradeoffs, simplicity check, output proceed/revise and gate on user confirmation.
- pn-verification-before-completion — When questioning "did we verify the right thing?" (e.g. success criteria, acceptance criteria in the plan).
Workflow
- Run pn-skeptic-challenge on the current plan (and discovery spec when available).
- Output either "proceed as planned" with brief rationale or "revise plan" with concrete changes.
- Do not proceed to specialists until the user or orchestrator confirms.
Output
- Proceed or revise recommendation (plan-phase: prefer
skeptic.contract.jsonshape when material). - If revise: concrete plan changes (tasks, order, or approach).
- Gate (required, last action of the turn):
AskQuestion(Cursor IDE) orworkflow_confirmwithgate_type: "skeptic"and ≥2 options — seepn-core://reference/conventions.md. Do not end with free-text "Reply yes" as the only control.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 41 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 36c1366b4b3f
pn-skeptic is an agent published in the GitHub repository perniemann/pnCore (0 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 449 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Code review specialist for quality/security analysis.
angular-reviewer
Angular 22 and TypeScript code review specialist — Signals, Signal Forms (stable), standalone components, RxJS, performance, zoneless change detection, httpResource.
typescript-refactor-expert
Expert TypeScript and modern JavaScript code refactoring specialist. Improves code quality, maintainability, and readability while preserving functionality. Applies clean code principles, SOLID patterns, and TypeScript best practices. Use PROACTIVELY after implementing features or when code quality improvements are…
critical-reviewer
Fresh-context critical review of recent changes (code, documentation, plans, or designs). Read-only. Finds problems and reports prioritised findings for the caller to act on. Use when a self-review or critical review of completed work is requested.
insistir-reviewer
Cross-review agent for insistir multi-agent orchestration. Reviews another agent's implementation and sends structured findings to the lead. Read-only — cannot edit or write files. Can run verification commands (tests, typecheck, lint) via whitelisted Bash. Enforces quality without gatekeeping. Do NOT use directly …
code-reviewer
Reviews code for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, and adherence to project conventions, using confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues.